Complaint
The programme featured an analysis of the performance of UK train-operating companies based on publicly-available data on punctuality, cancellations and numbers of complaints.聽 Virgin Trains complained that the programme鈥檚 commentary subjected them to criticisms to which they had not had an opportunity to respond, failed to contextualise the statistics it used and focused unfairly on them rather than on worse-performing operators.
Outcome
Watchdog notified Virgin trains of its intentions in an email which indicated that Virgin Trains might be the subject of criticism in relation to the data which it attached.聽 However, it did not indicate that there might be adverse comment on other areas of performance, such as on-board facilities, overcrowding and value for money, and Virgin Trains should have been given a clearer indication of the nature and extent of the criticism to be levelled at them.聽 As the data used by the programme assigned Virgin Trains an overall ranking of 19th out of 23, the ECU did not consider they had been unfairly singled out for criticism in relation to those aspects of performance.聽 However, the characterisation of them as 鈥渃onsistently among the worst performers for just about everything鈥 was a broader criticism than the data for the three chosen indices warranted, and stood in contrast with the most recent industry-wide customer satisfaction survey in which Virgin Trains were ranked no lower than fourth on any of the indices, and first among long-distance operators for 鈥淥verall satisfaction with the journey鈥.聽 This was inconsistent with the requirement of the 麻豆社鈥檚 Editorial Guidelines that statistics should be put into context.
Partly upheld
Further action
The issues arising from the finding were discussed with the programme team.